Dear Philippe and fellow Councilors, As it appears that Donna Austin – who was part of the effort 3 years – is all but confirmed by the RySG to carry the Registry voice, As Donna and I are both GoDaddy Registry employees, I opted in a first instance not to raise my hand for this. In the absence of response from my fellow Councilors, In the absence of apparent movement on the RySG side, and As our liaison to the ccNSO, I am happy to raise my hand for this and work with Donna and our ccNSO counterparts on this review. Kindly, Sebastien Ducos GoDaddy Registry | Senior Client Services Manager [signature_599368861] +33612284445 +61449623491 Level 8, 10 Queens Road Melbourne, VIC, Australia 3004 sebastien@registry.godaddy<mailto:sebastien@registry.godaddy> www.linkedin.com/in/sebastienducos<https://www.linkedin.com/in/sebastienducos> From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of philippe.fouquart--- via council <council@gnso.icann.org> Date: Tuesday, 27 July 2021 at 11:34 am To: council@gnso.icann.org <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Interest for the Effectiveness Review of the Customer Standing Committee Caution: This email is from an external sender. Please do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Forward suspicious emails to isitbad@. Dear Councilors, In light of the absence of response, the diversity within the CSC does not seem to be critical (and that’s quite consistent with our initial thinking within leadership). We will take that forward with the RySG and try and come up with a consistent team for the review. Thanks. Philippe From: FOUQUART Philippe INNOV/NET Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2021 3:21 PM To: council@gnso.icann.org Subject: Interest for the Effectiveness Review of the Customer Standing Committee Dear councilors, By the end of August, we will need to appoint our GNSO members for the effectiveness review of the Customer Standing Committee. According to the CSC charter, the effectiveness of the CSC is reviewed two years after the first meeting [2 years, that was back in 2018] and then every three years thereafter (this is now). The method of review will be determined by the ccNSO and GNSO. Our initial thought within the leadership was to replicate the approach we adopted in 2018 and which worked extremely well, both in terms of the small size of the team (2 GNSO + 2 CCs), and the composition with the ccNSO liaison being one member and a RySG member would be another. Last time we did that, however, it so happened that our liaison to the ccNSO Council wasn’t from the RySG (I happened to be that liaison at the time). Having discussed this within the leadership, we appreciate this is of interest mostly to the registries, but we don’t want to let it go unnoticed if there is an interest from other groups to put forward a member for this CSC effectiveness review team. If you or your group have an interest in taking part, would you please say so by the end of next week? (July 23rd) Thank you. Regards, Philippe https://www.icann.org/public-comments/csc-effectiveness-initial-2019-01-16-e... https://community.icann.org/display/ER/Effectiveness+Review+Home _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.
